Talk:Star Valley Medical Center

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (I am not employed by the hosptial, I just want to inform just like you would in a encyclopedia. I wrote most of the information myself, if there is anything I can do to keep the page up while making it seem less bias, please let me know and help me! Thanks!) --7simplepromise (talk) 16:39, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

What you need to do is reduce the article to a stub so it isn't so overburdened. Then you need to remove any material that could be construed as promotional, and clearly indicate in the lead why the subject is important. If you do all that, the article might survive. G S Palmer (talk) 16:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Delete. This is the third time in two weeks that someone has created this page. Twice before it has been speedy-deleted. This user created the last deleted version. Aside from other issues, text from this is largely lifted from the text at the Star Valley Medical Center website. The user should create this page in a sandbox and submit it for review instead of continuing to create new pages with the same material. (talk) 17:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure how this works, but 7simplepromise's Talk page, and my records, show that this user created the Star Valley Medical Center page on May 12 (it was speedy-deleted the same day). But clicking on the user's contributions only show the creation and editing of this page on 15 May. How can the 12 May creation and edits not be in the record? Prof. Mc (talk) 19:30, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

@Prof. Mc: Because the page was recreated instead of being restored, and unless you're an admin and can view the nuke log, you can't see edits to a deleted page. Hope this explains it.

G S Palmer (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

@G S Palmer: It does explain it, yes. Thanks for taking the time to clear it up. I appreciate it. Prof. Mc (talk) 17:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Article full of promotional and copyright material again

It's back, and once again it's full of promotional material and material directly copied from the hospital's various webpages (complete with strange grammar). I'm going to weed out as much of the promotional material and copied material as I can. When I'm done we can look at what's left and see if there is enough to justify keeping it. Meters (talk) 18:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Copyright violations, invalid free-use images, and promotional material removed. The article certainly needs work but the hospital appears notable and I don't see a reason to delete the article again. Meters (talk) 19:07, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Name change

Hello, newbie here. I am trying to change the name of this article to Star Valley Health. The company underwent a recent rebranding/name change. I tried to enter a technical request Template:RMassist must be used on Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. but I must not understand where to place it as it came back with an error. Any help in understanding how to make these updates is appreciated. Thank you --AMatterofPerspective (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

First.let's deal with the possible conflict of interest. This article has a history of edits by WP:SPAs which suggest possible conflict of interest or even undeclared paid editing. Please read WP:COI and disclose any conflict of interest you may have.

As for the name change, it's not difficult to do, but there's no rush. We go by WP:COMMONNAME. "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's 'official' name as an article title" The hospital may have rebranded itself a few weeks ago, but that does not necessarily mean that the common name has changed already. Meters (talk) 20:46, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. There are a lot of regulations to Wikipeda! It's a bit overwhelming. I am considering the point you make about a possible conflict of interest. It is true that this is the only article that I have edited(so far), and that I am employed by this organization. My main purpose was to update it with the correct information and try to rephrase the original grammar as it seemed awkward. Everything in the article is factual, and I did try to phrase the information without a bias, but maybe I did not do that as well as I thought. It is not my intention to break any rules, but I am not sure how one is to avoid a conflict of interest because unless someone who cares about the organization (in this case me) takes the initiative to update the information, it is likely that it would not be updated. So what is the proper way of getting a page updated if you might have a conflict? --AMatterofPerspective (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Read WP:COI. It tells you how to deal with a COI. WP:COIEDIT and the links in that section tell you how to disclose your COI and how to propose edits to an article in which you have a COI. Since you work for the company you will need to follow the more restrictive rules for disclosure in WP:PAY if these edits are part of your job. The rest of the rules are the same as for editors with normal COIs.. Meters (talk) 02:55, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

- - - - - -

So this scenario is only too common, and frustrating for me. I am one of a small number of active volunteers working without compensation to support one of the top sites on the Internet. A site that endeavors to have trustworthy, reliable and independently-produced encyclopedic, notable information. The site that other sites (e.g. Facebook, Google, YouTube, Alexa) link to in order to provide their users with "trustworthy, reliable and independently-produced information". I imagine this small, rural healthcare provider already has a page on Facebook – that's where you can go to self-publish information about your healthcare organization. Wikipedia is supposed to be different. Its articles aren't supposed to be self-published.

AMatterofPerspective is just one of many single-purpose editors, likely paid by their employer to facilitate the creation or maintenance of the Wikipedia article about their organization. As there are still a vast number of remaining organizations, albeit fewer than there used to be before the epidemic of corporate mergers, these single-purpose editors collectively vastly outnumber the relatively small number of active volunteers, so we are overwhelmed in attempting to respond to them all. The Wikimedia Foundation collects all the money donated to support their website, and keeps it all for themselves. They have a number of supported initiatives for advocacy, capacity building, product and technology, resource allocation, revenue streams, roles & responsibilities and community health. You will note that the one thing that they DO NOT support is the thing that most donors think their money goes towards... content production and maintenance.

Given that background, I'll respond to the specific issue of the corporate name change. What part of the message "Template:RMassist must be used on Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests" is not clear? How can I improve this message to make it more clear? There are two links in that message, and following either one should guide the way for intended use. We centralize such requests on the single page Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests, where administrators patrol for new page move requests and process them. I'm here because I patrol for the {{error}} messages, which we try to minimize. Generally Wikipedia uses the name most commonly used in reliable sources, so you should look for that. It appears that the reliable news source for the Star Valley is SVI Media, so use this search and voila, find this May 8, 2019 report by trusted reporter Sarah Hale. That may be cited as the source supporting the name change, and assuming that this may be the only reliable source in the Star Valley we may assume that the majority of sources have adopted the new name and thus it has become the new "common name" for this healthcare organization.

I realize that this is a lot to expect from a drive-by single-purpose editor, to understand the proper way to make the name change by following the community procedures and guidelines. The learning curve can be a bit steep, especially for those disinclined to put a significant amount of time into the task. Unfortunately there are not yet any paid online "Wikipedians in residence" to help you with this task. I'm not feeling in the mood right now, please try this yourself – wait, don't, you might get blocked for COI editing if you do, sorry. Maybe it will fly if done by an anonymous unregistered editor, just don't use a hospital computer whose IP may be traced. Or wait a few days to see if I'm feeling more charitable, and return to make the page move and edit with the citation in support of the new name. Maybe someone else watching will feel charitable sooner.

Be thankful that you have received relatively civil responses so far. Some of Wikipedia's volunteers who have less patience could have treated you worse. Some are on a jihad against COI editing, while I take a more tolerant view on that issue. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:06, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

COI disclosure

This was a great learning experience and I thank you for your patience in helping me learn. I have tried to update the page with current information as per requested, but know from now on to request someone else to to this to avoid COI and maintain the integrity of Wikipedia. I hope that I have made this disclosure properly now, and would like to request a review from an impartial editor as well as assistance in updating the name of the company. ( I did cite the source of the name change this time.) Thank you for your friendly assistance. --AMatterofPerspective (talk) 22:55, 23 July 2019 (UTC)